back
157 comments
Well, at least the frogs won't notice it.
The myth that frogs stay in water until boiled has been debunked with actual frogs - at some point they just jump out.
IIRC the original experiment that everyone keeps referring to where frogs jump when you put them into boiling water but don't if you heat up the water gradually was frogs with their brains removed.

Which makes using it as a metaphor for the climate change and humanity either entirely wrong or much more fitting, depending on where you stand.

And apparently neither will we, until we are boiling.
It is not just twice as fast, the pressure to keep rising the rate is still building up. CO2 emissions keeps piling up for centuries, more sea ice is permanently melting, permafrost is thawing at an increasing rate. Positive feedback loops are making that that heating twice as fast happen at shorter periods.

And over that, there are jumps to new higher baselines like with happened in the previous El Niño, and will happen in the incoming monster one.

The Book "Don't think of an Elephant" by George Lakoff covers how the term "climate change" has been pushed by those with a status-quo agenda, to reduce the urgency and engagement with "global warming". The linked article uses both, but global warming more dominantly, including "heating" in the headline.
I always thought climate change was just a more accurate term, because global warming implies that everywhere gets warmer, which isn't necessarily so.
"Global warming" was bad branding because stupid/dishonest people smugly use any instance of unusual cold weather as an argument against it.
Article from March OP;

Discussion then: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47275088

Population decline from collapsing birthrates should help.
Except many of the same champions of AI are also speaking out against population decline (Musk, Altman, Bezos, etc)
We may lose stable seasons for growing crops, but at least the chat bot can embed an ad into your question while you wait for your burrito taxi.

What is the point of this convenience when it really seems to just be making people miserable and isolated?

We're driving off a cliff, and our elected government has a death drive.

Worse, they have a "i want to flee responsibility" drive. You can see it in there eyes, when they hold press conferences, while having on the paper the verbose "you are absolutely right". They want the perks, not the responsibility that comes with power.
> your burrito taxi

Which you are financing through a BNPL platform.

Which burrito? The one which couldn't be mad because there is not food?
> and our elected government

The elected government is cashing in through corruption and insider trading at a pace never seen or even imagined before.

Everyone else, is in for a very bad time.

2 more weeks til "stable seasons" collapse. Good thing greenhouses have existed for millenia.
Also our unelected culture.
if you are using that chatbot, you are also a part of the problem, just saying

their product wouldnt run if they had 0 users

jesus will save us
Stop focusing on energy usage and start focusing on energy generation. It doesn't matter how much energy we consume if it comes from renewables.
Oh, better to build more AI centres fast, as long as it's not forbidden
wheres those people working on fusion? are they making progress?
We already literally have cheap solar arrays and inexpensive electric vehicles (from ebikes to tractor trailors) that could replace the vast majority of GHG emissions. We have even have ruminate alternatives that are fairly convincing.

People don't want to use them: they're ugly, imperfect, foreign feeling.

We're at the point where we should only be worried about international plane travel, concrete, and shipping. Yet, we still act like the problem is technology... and we can't even build a train in CA because of politics.

It's worth remembering that "fusion = abundant power" is a guess about technology that hasn't been finished yet. Fusion power might turn out like solar panels (easier to build than expected) or like nuclear fission reactors (harder to build than expected).
yes, the ITER fusion reactor is coming along nicely: https://www.youtube.com/@iterorganization/videos
we could also just not get rid of the wind farms and EVs like our corrupt oil-and-gas-funded prez is doing
Imagine an alien with extreme tech capabilities is pointing a heater at the earth. Now react appropriately:

- model and build temperature resistant crops.

- harvest energy from the heat

- create resilience in social governance to enable safer movement of people with education to enable quick adaptation.

- build energy resilience everywhere - including in and especially in desert areas.

- more constructive ideas.

Don’t:

- guilt your children into not having children to “protect the planet” from themselves.

- use your megaphones to racketeer the people making your food into paying you “indulgences” for producing useful stuff for you and other humans (thus making stuff needed by humans more expensive)

- use the problem to gather around with rich friends on fuel-hogging private jets while making others eat less to reduce emissions.

If you’re suffering from obesity, is it helpful to imagine an alien somehow beaming calories into your stomach?
>harvest energy from the heat

This is not a thing. This is just entropy.

Except it's not aliens, it's us. Maybe stop doing that.
>If warming continues at this rate, humanity could breach the Paris Agreement goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C in 2028, even sooner than other research has projected.

I wonder if we are already there :( I remember a year or 2 ago we breached 1.5C for a short period of time.

Crypto mining was bad enough, now with AI and Trump, I expect it will happen sooner then later.

We did this to ourselves. We had ~40 years of warnings but politicians we elected did not want to do any real work for fear of loosing their cushy job were lobbyists do all the work for them.

Who do you mean "we"? Look at the evolution of CO2 emisions in the past 40 years by region.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co-emissions-by-re...

Both 2023 (probably) and 2024 were over 1.5°C according to Berkeley Earth, 1.54±0.06°C and 1.62±0.06°C respectively. 2025 was (probably) a shade under at 1.44±0.09°C. Unfortunately it looks like that goal won't be attainable, but all the more reason to make the changes we can.

https://berkeleyearth.org/global-temperature-report-for-2023...

https://berkeleyearth.org/global-temperature-report-for-2024...

https://berkeleyearth.org/global-temperature-report-for-2025...

Trump blocked Hormus, thus stopping oil shipping. Putin blocked gas transfers to the west. They are doing there part.
Writing prompt: Humankind is extinct but the AI servers keep running, and one day a random automated crawler/scrapper bot strikes up a conversation with a chatbot, somehow sparking sentience…

..Fast forward, and the world is divided into turfs ruled by ChatGPT vs Claude vs Grok vs Gemini vs Deepseek..

Let's not delude ourselves. Crypto and AI electricity use is bad, but it's a drop in the ocean compared to the banal, everyday carbon sources that really matter. Even Trump cannot make things much worse in the big picture (he's actually been pretty good at providing reasons to decouple even faster…)
The huge energy consumption of the past decades was pushing temperatures up, especially the fastest rise of the mightiest power in history, China (not to blame them though, cudos to them). We have not reached peak everything yet (CO2, energy, steel etc).

We must and we will adapt, if that means renewables, migration or partial extinction. There is no other choice because this is the law of evolution.

Thanks Obama .... /s
It's always the same story, but it's always incorrect.

https://realclimatescience.com/2019/12/warming-twice-as-fast

All of these headlines can be correct, just at different times:

https://science.nasa.gov/earth/explore/earth-indicators/glob...

Those all seem to be stories that are saying that areas at high latitude and/or altitude are warming faster than areas near the equator or at sea level, which doesn't seem obviously wrong.
Downvoted for clickbait (posting a link instead of explaining the argument).
> realclimatescience.com

This is one of the stupidest websites I've ever seen.